RPS Exclusive Lack Of A Battlefield 3 Review

Share this:

As you’ll have noticed, RPS is yet to have brought you a review of Battlefield 3. This is because, unfortunately, EA seemed to forget to give us a copy in advance of release. So instead, below is a picture of a puppy on a unicorn.

RPS did you check the questionnaire section which asked if you are a fan of Call of Duty, if so i wouldn’t expect a review* copy too soon. LOL

Did the reviewer personally review BFBC2 or Black Ops?
What score did he give it?
What is his past experience with Battlefield?
Is he a fan of Battlefield?
Is he a fan of Call of Duty?
Has he been playing BF Franchise? BFBC2? 1943? BF2?
Has he expressed enthusiasm or concern for BF3? What are they?
Did he play the beta? Did he enjoy it / get frustrated with it?
What is his present view on the game?

If I had to guess, I’d say EA is not sure RPS would give it a positive rating, so they’re forgoing giving them a review copy. Not a stretch, considering they were holding a survey to find out who to have their game reviewed by. This just reconfirms that we should wait for actual, real people’s experiences with this game, instead of reviewers who will happily point out all flaws and then slap a 9/10 on it anyway.

It was recently revealed that EA was deciding which Norwegian games publications they will send a pre-release copy of BF3 to by looking over what the publication and reviewer had to say about past Battlefield and Call of Duty games.

Nothing directly to do with reviewers being “corrupt”. Instead it’s about EA allegedly only allowing publications and journalists to review their products if they’re fairly confident that they’ll either be nice about it, or at least not spend the whole review saying how MW3 is totally going to be better.

That RPS has not been sent a review copy would mostly fit with this theory, as RPS has at least not been as enthusiastic about linear shooters than other publications. Then again there’s been quite a lot of positive Bad Company 2 coverage around here, and certainly no fanboy-like clamouring for MW3 coverage.

If EA is attempting to control their PR, and only those sites that are willing to surrender some measure of control to EA are given early review copies, it is reasonable to assume those reviews will be biased positively towards BF3. By stretching it a bit much, you can also say that all those reviewers are corrupt people who would happily feed their grandmothers to the ravenous bugblatter beast of Traal in order to get pageviews.

“If EA is attempting to control their PR, and only those sites that are willing to surrender some measure of control to EA are given early review copies, it is reasonable to assume those reviews will be biased positively towards BF3.”

Except that the sites that were sent these questions decided not to answer the questions that were inappropriate, and still got their review code.

I love how people immediately jump to the “reviewers are corrupt”-conclusion. Instead of responding to the questions like good little doggies, these publications started an open discussion about them which obviously blew up in EA’s face. But nooo, let’s forget THAT. Let’s just assume they’re corrupt anyway!

In-game voip was planned, however the community engagement team highlighted that the PC audience would complain that there was no “push to talk” capability, and considering everyone with friends already uses Vent/TS/Mumble they’d get less complainants if they simply cut voip completely.

* and those without friends would be grateful to be saved from getting abused by foul mouthed 12 year olds.

The story is told in flashback by a soldier named Blackburn to two government agents, and every time he begins to talk of another mission, you start to play it. It’s hard not to imagine his ridiculous storytelling. “We were in Tehran, dealing with PLR insurgents. And then I shot a man, and then I shot another man, and then one threw a grenade, and I ran away, and then I came back, and I shot six men, and then two spawned behind a wall, and I shot them, and…”.

So it’s not an RPS Exclusive Lack?!?! I feel betrayed. I can’t believe they would lie to us like that, and using a poor, innocent, underage puppy as part of their deviousness just makes it worse.

Though, now i’ve read that (awesome) not-review, I feel it’s essentially what RPS would have written.

In these moments when you’re clicking on heads popping up from behind low walls – and that’s most of the game – I found it as tedious and frustrating as that other series.

Where it differs, and becomes vastly more enjoyable, is when you’re fighting inside a vehicle. There’s a tank section you’ll have seen in trailers, and another where you play co-pilot in a fighter jet. The latter is awkwardly shoved in to the plot, but it’s worth it, and both are vast and exciting.

Still, it’s not why I play PC games, and it’s not why I play Battlefield games.

Have you bothered contacting EA/DICE to ask why you haven’t had a review copy? I’d be interested to hear their reasons, even though they’d probably spout some BS about you leaking the code or something.

You’ll be thinking of a tricorn(e) hat. Though agreed, a unicorn hat would be infinitely cooler.
Latin word roots, anything beginning “tri” usually has three *somethings*, anything beginning “uni” normally has one *something*.

Cut out the puns guys. On a more serious note, maybe RPS wasn’t allowed a copy because they didn’t agree to some EA legal clawse? This question seems purrtinent since their recent cat-astrophic pull from Steam due to apparent Terms of Service mewddling.

I can’t believe how unfairly balanced this game is, I mean a unicorn has both speed, stamina and a solid attack rating without perks or unlocks. Combined with the puppy (an Andrex Puppy at that!) to increase the cuteness rating, it ultimately breaks the game.

How are my eagle and Buzz Lightyear combo ever going to fairly compete against that!

And I like how I’ve just excitedly done the rounds of my favourite gaming sites to find a trusted review and none of them have one yet! Not even Eurogamer who have their own Battlefield 3 microsite! I think you’re not the only ones, RPS. Not to worry

Storytelling in retrospect is ridiculous for games. Even when it does work, such as in Sands of Time, it’s a hackneyed solution where the narrator has to go back and retell his story again because ‘that’s not what happened’ whenever the player dies.

You can log in to the BF3 battlelog right now, setup your profile, install the plugin (for squad voice and game launching), and hit the forums. Some are already unlocking the single player via VPN, but I won’t bother with it.

Unfortunately there’s no way to have multiple soldiers on your profile or change display name, though your Origin ID can be changed if you haven’t used the desired nickname with a previous EA game. Bit of a snafu there, lots of forum posts about this. Likewise with veteran status from old games. Com-rose is in but apparently a work in progress. Negative mouse acceleration is also new … sigh.